Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Hypocrisy of pro-lifers being anti-LGBTQIA

Opinion

Hypocrisy of pro-lifers being anti-LGBTQIA
Getty Images

Steve Corbin is Professor Emeritus of Marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.

The prefix “pro-“ means to support a cause. The noun “life” is defined as an organism composed of cells that can grow, learn and respond to stimuli preceding death. It stands to reason that a pro-lifer is a radical proponent that from cell development until death -- everyone -- is supported. Everyone!


Most right-wing evangelicals and conservative Catholics proudly boast of being pro-life. MAGA Republican die-hards fondly recall a January 2020 March for Life rally where Donald Trump thanked participants for “making America the pro-family, pro-life nation.”

Simply stated, you cannot be pro-life unless you also support the 7.2 percent of babies who grow up to be LGBTQIA and – by the way – are living under the same canopy of heaven and with God’s divine grace.

LGBTQIA is an abbreviation for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or questioning, intersex, asexual/aromantic/agender. One out of every 13 people you meet could be LGBTQIA (Gallup, Feb. 2023). Medical research is replete with evidence that 1.7 percent of human births are intersex (Journal of Sex Research), whereby the genitalia cannot be classified as female (XX chromosomes) or male (XY chromosomes). The Novo Nordisk Foundation reveals intersex children and their parents are not aware of the chromosome gene mutation until the child reaches puberty.

The LGBTQIA population breaks down – per Gallup research -- as follows:

1) 20.8 percent of Gen Z (age 20-26), 2) 10.5 percent of Millennials (age 27-42), 3) 4.2 percent of Gen Z (age 43-58), 4) 2.6 percent of Baby Boomers (age 59-77) and 5) 0.8 percent of Traditionalists (78 and older).

Seventy-nine percent of Americans want to protect LGBTQIA rights. Deniers of the LGBTQIA population probably don’t know – or if they do know shame on them -- repercussions of their “anti-“ stance. According to a 2021 survey by the Trevor Project, over 50 percent of transgender and non-binary kids have considered suicide and 93 percent say they worry about state laws denying transgender people access to gender-affirming medical care.

Research conducted by Child Trends revealed a statistically significant increase in mental health crisis text lines when anti-LGBTQIA legislation bills are introduced. LGBTQIA teens are five times more likely to make an attempt on their life than their straight peers. Negative actions and attitudes against LGBTQIA teenagers can have serious, life-altering consequences. This data should be a wakeup call for pro-lifers, especially if they value life and disdain suicide and mental health issues.

In October of 2018, Mr. Trump sought to reclassify people into an “unchangeable” category of male or female, which completely denies the existence of transgender and intersex people; a clear violation of human rights. I presume pro-lifers value human rights.

Organizations behind the anti-LGBTQIA legislation that’s been introduced in over 42 states include the conservative legal powerhouse Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation and the Christian nationalist (who despise all other religions and are anti-Semitic) lobby group Family Policy Alliance.

When 79 percent of Americans who support LGBTQIA rights witness evangelical parishioners and houses of worship tout anti-LGBTQIA beliefs, might this be one reason behind the decline of religious affiliation and church attendance?

Mayors, city council and school board members plus county, state and federal elected officials who took an oath of office to represent all citizens and are anti-LGBTQIA have betrayed the public’s trust and society’s soul. We the People – as per the Constitution -- should do our utmost to rid prejudice-laden politicians from serving unless they can represent 100 percent of their respective citizenry.

Pro-life citizens who are anti-LGBTQIA should seriously reflect on what Nelson Mandella – who devoted his life to the service of humanity -- once said, “there can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”


Read More

US Flag
us a flag on pole under cloudy sky

This Country ’Tis of Thee Calls America to Unite Again

In July 2024, before the presidential election, I was deeply moved by a song written by New York/Nashville recording artist and songwriter Candace Asher. It’s called “This Country ’Tis of Thee.” Asher is internationally and critically acclaimed for several top‑five hits and airplay in 12 countries in the early 2000s.

I teamed up with Candace, and together we wrote new, contemporary lyrics for “This Country ’Tis of Thee,” and together we produced the video that went live on YouTube.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. President Donald Trump greets Russian President Vladimir Putin in front of a landed airplane.

U.S. President Donald Trump (R) greets Russian President Vladimir Putin as he arrives at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson on August 15, 2025 in Anchorage, Alaska.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

What Would Putin’s Puppet Do Differently?

This winter, Russia plans to freeze Ukraine into submission. According to an intercepted Russian plan, Moscow intends to use hundreds of ballistic missiles, long-range drones, and glide bombs to strike Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Odesa with such intensity that they are cut off from power, heat, and water, slashing electricity and heat by up to 90 percent and crippling sewage systems. Russia hopes that with an energy system so thoroughly destroyed, millions of Ukrainian citizens would become so cold, sick, and desperate that their country might just surrender. Deliberately attacking the heat and water of civilians is a war crime, but Moscow thinks it can get away with it. Ukraine is running short on the Patriot interceptors it needs to stop ballistic missiles, and Putin is betting Trump will continue to betray Ukraine. It’s looking like a safe bet.

Trump shows no evidence to the contrary. On October 9, he got off a call with the Russian president and then immediately lifted U.S. sanctions on Russian diesel. The next day, after Russian strikes killed at least 17 people in Zaporizhzhia, Trump announced it was “time for Ukraine to get a new president.” Days later, the American-controlled satellite network Ukraine’s military depends on was throttled without warning, knocking out service to the drones Ukraine uses to chase down Russian attack drones. Trump denied giving the order, but The Telegraph reported that Musk pitched the idea and Trump agreed.

Keep ReadingShow less
An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less